would this HP ML be OK for Exchange 2007?

Superficial

Superficial

Superficial

Soldato
Joined
29 Oct 2002
Posts
4,166
Location
London
Hi there

This is my first time setting up a system with Exchange 2007 standard and by all accounts it is a serious resource hog.

My proposed server is this:

HP ProLiant ML350 G5 Entry - Quad-Core Xeon E5310 1.6 GHz

1 x Quad-Core Xeon E5310 / 1.6 GHz running on SBS 2008 64 Bit

Will I need 4GB of RAM for it? EDIT: I have decided on getting an extra 4gb RAM so 5 in total now

EDIT: it's intended for 5 - 10 users and the Manuf# is 440188-031
 
Last edited:
How tight is your budget? I'd take extra RAM over spending more on a the next CPU (QC E5410 @ 2.3GHz). Eight DIMM slots, so with it coming with 2 x 512MB, you've got a bit space to play with. You might find 2 x 2GB (which are 2 x 1GB sticks) kits works out cheaper than 1 x 4GB kit.

It's an "Entry" model so the E200 RAID Controller can only do RAID 0 or 1. The BBWC module (351580-B21) upgrades the cache on the controller and adds RAID 5 support. It's only £60ish IIRC.
 
#Chri5# said:
How tight is your budget? I'd take extra RAM over spending more on a the next CPU (QC E5410 @ 2.3GHz). Eight DIMM slots, so with it coming with 2 x 512MB, you've got a bit space to play with. You might find 2 x 2GB (which are 2 x 1GB sticks) kits works out cheaper than 1 x 4GB kit.

It's an "Entry" model so the E200 RAID Controller can only do RAID 0 or 1. The BBWC module (351580-B21) upgrades the cache on the controller and adds RAID 5 support. It's only £60ish IIRC.
Click to expand...

ok good info again Chris - ill grab that BBWC anabler for £67 and stick 4GB of RAM in it.

thanks for the Assist guys.
 
Depending on if you can afford it, I'd forget about the E200 controller and buy something better (P400/600 probably). I've just ordered 4 ML350s (but mine are 2x 2.66 Quad Core, 16GB RAM etc...), they're good boxes and good value (we buy them because we need mroe expansion cards than you'll get in a DL380 and a DL580 is stupid money just for more slots...)

They'll also take small form factor SAS drives, up to 146GB 15k units, which will be much quicker than SATA...
 
Sounds like overkill for 5 - 10 users, have you considered licensing costs for running the OS and Exchange Independently?

I would recommend SBS 2003 to be honest, one license will cover both Clients, Exchange and SQL.
 
Curiosityx said:
Sounds like overkill for 5 - 10 users, have you considered licensing costs for running the OS and Exchange Independently?

I would recommend SBS 2003 to be honest, one license will cover both Clients, Exchange and SQL.
Click to expand...

hmm - you may have highlighted an area of weakness for me - I shall call microsoft tomorrow and make sure I have my licensing info correct.

EDIT: is now not the time to make the move to 64-bit? Costs are important but i want a future proof system also.

thanks,
 
Last edited:
bigredshark said:
Depending on if you can afford it, I'd forget about the E200 controller and buy something better (P400/600 probably). I've just ordered 4 ML350s (but mine are 2x 2.66 Quad Core, 16GB RAM etc...), they're good boxes and good value (we buy them because we need mroe expansion cards than you'll get in a DL380 and a DL580 is stupid money just for more slots...)

They'll also take small form factor SAS drives, up to 146GB 15k units, which will be much quicker than SATA...
Click to expand...

hi There,

have read a few of your posts and it seems you know your stuff

I wanted your opinion on my question above really - do you feel that a move to 2008 and 64-bit now is the right thing to do? or is there merit in sticking with 2003?

if we try as best we can to ignore the financials my pov is to provide a solid platform for at least five years and it does seem that having a 10-year old platform (by 2013) might be stretching things.

thanks,
 
I presume the OP means SBS?

There's a new MS "platform" called Essential Business Server which has RTM'd. That is a 3 or 4 server solution (Management, Messaging, Security for Standard, + Database in the Premium version).

If you want to buy SBS 2003, then decide soon. SBS 2008 is being plugged by MS distributors now, so 2003 isn't going to be around too much longer. Obviously to support Exchange 2007, SBS 2008 is x64 only.

I'd probably go for SBS 2008 though you might have a few headaches as it's so new. For instance, IIRC, there was a faulty CD shipped in the early copies of SBS 2003. It wasn't a big workaround to sort it but it was a pain on the early installs (until MS replaced the CDs).
 
Superficial said:
hi There,

have read a few of your posts and it seems you know your stuff

I wanted your opinion on my question above really - do you feel that a move to 2008 and 64-bit now is the right thing to do? or is there merit in sticking with 2003?

if we try as best we can to ignore the financials my pov is to provide a solid platform for at least five years and it does seem that having a 10-year old platform (by 2013) might be stretching things.

thanks,
Click to expand...

I've 'discussed' (that'll be argued) this point before. I think x64 is the way to go right now, I think you'd be mad not to unless you have a very good reason not to. RAM is cheap these days and using x64 will let you put more than 4GB in a box without resorting to Enterprise version of windows, that's really a good enough reason in itself but it's also the future obviously and more and more apps will require it in future.

We run a backup system which has just moved to a new version which requires a 64bit OS, it's an extreme example because that sort of application is dealing with huge quantities of data (like 250TB on our platforms) so 64bit is a huge benefit. But they always offered 32bit previously and they've stop doing so, I think it'll become a trend before long.

2008 I'm less convinced, we're not in widespread deployment yet (but we have a corporate mentality about that sort of thing, so we're always late to move to the new versions...). It's good and if you don't have an investment in existing systems and staff familiarity with 2003 then I can't see why not, but it's not a compelling upgrade if you have working 2003 systems at present. The nicest features are the cluster services and terminal services improvements in my mind.
 
Why have you chosen that part number? Have you looked at top value?
You can get a better model for less money, with double memory and 2nd CPU FOC this month. If you want to stick with LFF drives, then look at

470064-610
Tower ProLiant ML350 G5 Xeon 5420 (2500/1333-2x6MB) Quad Core, 1GB (2x512MB), HP LFF SAS, E200i/128MB BBWC, DVD±R/RW, 3 Year NBD Warranty
(comes with 1GB and BBWC as standard.

or if you want to SFF drives then look at 470064-609
(Tower ProLiant ML350 G5 Xeon 5420 (2500/1333-2x6MB) Quad Core, 1GB (2x512MB), HP SFF SAS, E200i/128MB BBWC, DVD±R/RW, 3 Year NBD Warranty, same spec just 8 x SFF drives instead).

Free CPU and Memory Qualifyy products
 
Origin said:
Why have you chosen that part number? Have you looked at top value?
You can get a better model for less money, with double memory and 2nd CPU FOC this month. If you want to stick with LFF drives, then look at

470064-610
Tower ProLiant ML350 G5 Xeon 5420 (2500/1333-2x6MB) Quad Core, 1GB (2x512MB), HP LFF SAS, E200i/128MB BBWC, DVD±R/RW, 3 Year NBD Warranty
(comes with 1GB and BBWC as standard.

or if you want to SFF drives then look at 470064-609
(Tower ProLiant ML350 G5 Xeon 5420 (2500/1333-2x6MB) Quad Core, 1GB (2x512MB), HP SFF SAS, E200i/128MB BBWC, DVD±R/RW, 3 Year NBD Warranty, same spec just 8 x SFF drives instead).

Free CPU and Memory Qualifyy products
Click to expand...

that is brilliant mate

thanks a lot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom